Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › The Objectivist Audio Forum: Post #2 Definitions
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Objectivist Audio Forum: Post #2 Definitions

post #1 of 59
Thread Starter 
Our forum is not open yet, so I suppose we should continue our discussions here, where we are allowed to express our opinions.

We have been called Objectivists, but what we really represent is the "Science-Based" segment of this audio forum.

Being "Science-Based" does not mean that we automatically evoke the use of the old flame war bugaboos "Placebo", or "Burn in" or "DBT" or "Cables".

What it means is that we approach our hobby with the scientific method, and seek verification when various claims are made. Our prevailing views therefore will be based on fact.

The Scientific Method


If we are the "Science-Based" segment, we need to develop a non-inflammatory terminology to refer to the group that develops, what we view as, non-verifiable prevailing views? That is the purpose of this post.

Now, I would like to urge posters to this thread to ignore the troll posters, because come, they will, like they did in the last thread. It is pointless to engage them.

USG
post #2 of 59
*cringes and remembers Chemistry from last year...scientific method*

just messing with ya.
I like where you're going with this. I guess you're hoping to know how a source or headphones really are and you can really understand why they are/aren't how they are touted to be.
post #3 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baba booey View Post
*cringes and remembers Chemistry from last year...scientific method*

just messing with ya.
I like where you're going with this. I guess you're hoping to know how a source or headphones really are and you can really understand why they are/aren't how they are touted to be.
Welcome aboard!

USG
post #4 of 59
Count me in! I think this type of forum should exist as a standalone forum inside the 'Equipment Forums' category, as I think it should encompass more than just cables, tweaks, etc.
post #5 of 59
As I've proposed many times already I believe, the best for everyone is as follows:

1. Keep the Cable/Tweak forum where it currently is, but remove the ban on talking about DBT and generally encourage unbiased conversation there.

2. Create a subforum of the cable forum in which posters are forbidden from posting about DBT or anything like that.

It's important to have the "main" cable forum be unregulated (regarding DBT related talk) for a variety of reasons. It would also be interesting to have a totally independent subforum in the "Misc.-Category Forums" dedicated specifically to the discussion of science as it applies to audio (ie. scientific audio-related discussions not necessarily relating to cables and tweaks).

In the course of reading the many comments on the subject, I seem to see that most objections to conversations about DBT stem from the way the threads turn out due to not being moderated sufficiently rather than the nature of the subject being discussed. I think if people went back and forth arguing about whether the K701 or the HD650 was superior and started calling each other names and such, the posters involved would be warned not to act like fools, rather than a separate "K701 lovers" and "HD650 lovers" subforums being created.

If this works out the way it was originally planned (ie. separate, nested "Objectivist" subforum), I would reconsider my membership to this site. I'm not sure I could deal with that level of short sightedness and bias.
post #6 of 59
Really interesting!
post #7 of 59
I'd be very interested because I want to know how some of these minor things (e.g. burn-in) would affect sound.
post #8 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by monolith View Post
As I've proposed many times already I believe, the best for everyone is as follows:

1. Keep the Cable/Tweak forum where it currently is, but remove the ban on talking about DBT and generally encourage unbiased conversation there.

2. Create a subforum of the cable forum in which posters are forbidden from posting about DBT or anything like that.

It's important to have the "main" cable forum be unregulated (regarding DBT related talk) for a variety of reasons. It would also be interesting to have a totally independent subforum in the "Misc.-Category Forums" dedicated specifically to the discussion of science as it applies to audio (ie. scientific audio-related discussions not necessarily relating to cables and tweaks).

In the course of reading the many comments on the subject, I seem to see that most objections to conversations about DBT stem from the way the threads turn out due to not being moderated sufficiently rather than the nature of the subject being discussed. I think if people went back and forth arguing about whether the K701 or the HD650 was superior and started calling each other names and such, the posters involved would be warned not to act like fools, rather than a separate "K701 lovers" and "HD650 lovers" subforums being created.

If this works out the way it was originally planned (ie. separate, nested "Objectivist" subforum), I would reconsider my membership to this site. I'm not sure I could deal with that level of short sightedness and bias.
Hi Mono

Unfortunately, the Administration sees it differently, but as it turns out, that is not so bad.

As this sub forum is taking shape, it is becoming obvious that we can be much more than a just a Bit Rate, Cable, DBT, Test the Tweak forum.

By bringing the scientific method to our hobby, our general prevailing views will be "fact based". That is no small thing.

Glad to have you aboard.

USG
post #9 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwest1389 View Post
I'd be very interested because I want to know how some of these minor things (e.g. burn-in) would affect sound.
Hi RW, Welcome.

I see you're a student, what's your major?

USG
post #10 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by upstateguy View Post
Hi Mono

Unfortunately, the Administration sees it differently, but as it turns out, that is not so bad.

As this sub forum is taking shape, it is becoming obvious that we can be much more than a just a Bit Rate, Cable, DBT, Test the Tweak forum.

By bringing the scientific method to our hobby, our general prevailing views will be "fact based". That is no small thing.

Glad to have you aboard.

USG
I'd like to think all of my prevailing views are fact based. I wouldn't be much good in my field of study otherwise.

All I'd like is to bring some reason to the way things are being organised. I'm not sure how many different ways I can say to people that allowing this sort of discussion is the only way to have unbiased dialogue and learn about the hobby we all share. Audiophilia is a hobby based on science and engineering, not a religion.
post #11 of 59
I would also be very up for this. It seems perfectly logical.
post #12 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by monolith View Post
I'd like to think all of my prevailing views are fact based. I wouldn't be much good in my field of study otherwise.

All I'd like is to bring some reason to the way things are being organised. I'm not sure how many different ways I can say to people that allowing this sort of discussion is the only way to have unbiased dialogue and learn about the hobby we all share. Audiophilia is a hobby based on science and engineering, not a religion.
The Scientific forum is a great start.

It will be interesting to see what comes from Wavoman's tests. As with patent medicines and folk medicine, some of the audio remedies might actually turn out to have merit. We will just have to wait and see which ones can be verified and reproduced.

USG
post #13 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.D.N View Post
I would also be very up for this. It seems perfectly logical.
Welcome aboard JDN

USG
post #14 of 59
I think most people would agree with the scientific approach (although I prefer Popper's term "scientific methodology"). It's just that the "test with experiment" and "draw conclusion" parts are a bit tricky, e.g. whether DBT is a meaningful test. At the same time, the scientific approach propagated by certain members simply sounds snobbish and dogmatic, which is what most people dislike so much. Most of all, a hobby like audio should be something fun and relaxing, so there needs to be some balance between scientific vigour and blissful ignorance. So I think it's good that it be kept out of the normal cable forum. If it doesn't become a bashing forum of the ignorance of other members or a place trenched in scientific dogma like Hydrogenaudio, this could be an interesting sub-forum.
post #15 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by upstateguy View Post
Now, I would like to urge posters to this thread to ignore the troll posters, because come, they will, like they did in the last thread. It is pointless to engage them.

USG
You've gotta love the irony in that statement... were it not for all of the trolls in the cables forum who scream "cables make no difference" every time someone states a subjective preference for one cable over another, there would have been no need for the objectionists forum.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › The Objectivist Audio Forum: Post #2 Definitions